Bush Agrees With Rocker Decision
Dr Fuji Kamikaze
anus?
Bush Agrees With Rocker Decision
The Associated Press
Monday, Jan. 10, 2000; 9:24 p.m. EST
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000110/aponline212433_000.htm
WASHINGTON –– Texas Gov. George W. Bush, a former major league baseball
team owner, said Monday that Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker should be
required to undergo psychological testing over his disparaging comments about
minorities.
"I appreciate the fact that the Atlanta Braves are getting him counseling,"
Bush, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, said in a debate
Monday night in Michigan. "But ... in athletics, this is a world of some young
men who make a lot of money who don't – who aren't responsible for their
behavior."
Bush said that as president he would "usher in the responsibility era, so that
each American, whether you be a baseball player or anything, wear the uniform
of the United States, are responsible for the actions you take in life,"
Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig last week ordered Rocker to undergo testing and
said he would await the results before deciding on any disciplinary action.
Last month, Rocker told Sports Illustrated he would never play for a New York
team because he didn't want to ride a train "next to some queer with AIDS." He
also said, "I'm not a very big fan of foreigners. ... How the hell did they get
in this country?" He called a black teammate a "fat monkey," mocked the driving
skills of Asian women and insulted single mothers.
Rocker, 25, apologized and said he was not a racist.
In the debate, Bush, a former managing general partner of the Texas Rangers,
said of Rocker: "The fellow said some incredibly offensive things. He is a
public person. And I appreciate them trying to get the man help."
© Copyright 2000 The Associated Press
God Bless America
Dr Fuji Kamikase
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." --
Aesop
"A liberal is a man who will give away everything he doesn't own." -- Frank
Dane
eddie...@my-deja.com
Now there is something Dubya personally knows a whole lot about, young
men with money who aren't reponsible for their behavior. Maybe what
Shrub is saying here is Rocker should be sent to Yale?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
David Goldman
>some young
>> men who make a lot of money who don't – who aren't responsible for
>their
>> behavior."
This wasn't an issue of behavior, Dubya, it was an issue of OPINIONS
and THOUGHTS........
David Goldman
>baseball
>> team owner, said Monday that Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker
>should be
>> required to undergo psychological testing over his disparaging
>comments about
>> minorities.
How idiotic........what's next, re-education camps like under Mao
during the Cultural Revolution??? Who will be the Grand Inquisitor to
determine who does and does not need "psychological counseling" for
their political opinions?
David Goldman
>men with money who aren't reponsible for their behavior. Maybe what
>Shrub is saying here is Rocker should be sent to Yale?
ONLY if he can join Skull and Bones, and only if he can develop good
contacts with "freedom fighters" who traffic in cocaine.......
James W. Wright
>
> Can there be any doubt that DemocRats and RepubliCants all come out of the same
> anus?
>
> Bush Agrees With Rocker Decision
> The Associated Press
> Monday, Jan. 10, 2000; 9:24 p.m. EST
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000110/aponline212433_000.htm
>
> team owner, said Monday that Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker should be
> required to undergo psychological testing over his disparaging comments about
> minorities.
>
> Bush, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, said in a debate
> men who make a lot of money who don't – who aren't responsible for their
> behavior."
>
> each American, whether you be a baseball player or anything, wear the uniform
> of the United States, are responsible for the actions you take in life,"
>
> Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig last week ordered Rocker to undergo testing and
> said he would await the results before deciding on any disciplinary action.
>
> Last month, Rocker told Sports Illustrated he would never play for a New York
> team because he didn't want to ride a train "next to some queer with AIDS." He
> also said, "I'm not a very big fan of foreigners. ... How the hell did they get
> in this country?" He called a black teammate a "fat monkey," mocked the driving
> skills of Asian women and insulted single mothers.
>
> Rocker, 25, apologized and said he was not a racist.
>
> In the debate, Bush, a former managing general partner of the Texas Rangers,
> said of Rocker: "The fellow said some incredibly offensive things. He is a
> public person. And I appreciate them trying to get the man help."
>
> © Copyright 2000 The Associated Press
>
> God Bless America
> Dr Fuji Kamikase
>
> "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." --
> Aesop
> "A liberal is a man who will give away everything he doesn't own." -- Frank
> Dane
Well if we had a choice what would to make it reality. All of us here
and on other newsgroups could get an Independent in the White House this
year. Think about it. Want Social Security around?
http://www.wright2000.com/social security.htm
Ray Heizer
>
> Well if we had a choice what would to make it reality. All of us here
> and on other newsgroups could get an Independent in the White House this
> year. Think about it. Want Social Security around?
> http://www.wright2000.com/social security.htm
-- Found on the internet:
> My complaint about James W. Wright
>
> As a citizen of this country, which I believe in and which I have seen
> James W. Wright tear apart, I must announce that we may need to picket,
> demonstrate, march, or strike to stop James before he can create an
> atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate, but which, at the
> same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. Let us note first of all
> that his perversions reek like rotten eggs. It should be readily apparent
> that if the right thing to do in this case is determined by various vectors
> of forces in an endless multidimensional tug-of-war involving ropes leading
> out in many directions, then he is basically a bad person. Every concert
> that James attends rapidly degenerates into a free-for-all of slam dancing
> and scattered fistfights. If he ever claims that all literature which
> opposes sectarianism was forged by what I call obscene insecure-types, we
> must answer only one thing: "No, the reverse is true." His cronies should
> commit to a process that respects civil liberties, civil rights, and civil
> discourse. Implying that James never engages in blathering, snotty, or
> empty-headed politics is no different from implying that vicious depraved
> heretics are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive.
> Both statements are ludicrous. I leave it to more capable and intrepid
> folks to explore the full ramifications of his tracts.
>
> This is an exceptionally convincing illustration of the power wielded by
> James and of the destructive way in which he uses that power. However true
> that is, James formulates his positions in a precarious latticework between
> the untrustworthy and the mudslinging. Here's the heart of the matter: He
> intends to create a new social class. Perfidious turncoats, vindictive
> malcontents, and egocentric mystics will be given aristocratic status. The
> rest of us will be forced into serving as their lackeys.
>
> Perhaps James has never had to take a stand and fight for something as
> critical as our right to maintain social tranquillity. But I find that I am
> embarrassed. Embarrassed that some people don't realize that it's
> decisively time to put up or shut up. Although a thorough discussion of
> juvenile post-structuralism is beyond the scope of this letter, pride and
> solidarity prepare individuals to become partners in an alliance against
> short-sighted vandalism. I have just one word for James:
> philodestructiveness. It's somewhat tricky to justify condemnation,
> constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his yawping treacherous
> hijinks, especially since the media in this country tend to ignore
> historical connections and are reluctant to analyze ideological positions
> or treat a fringe political group seriously.
>
> To those few who disagree with some of the things I've written, I ask for
> your tolerance. His arguments do not come without a price. But that's not
> the end of the story. Many of our present-day sufferings are the
> consequence of the crafty relationship between him and hectoring apostates.
> I, for one, plan to work within the system to persuade my fellow citizens
> that James's virtue and brains are inversely proportionate to his vices and
> the size of his mouth, not because I lack the courage for more drastic
> steps, but because when I first realized that it is not possible fully to
> understand the present except as a projection of the past, a cold shudder
> ran down my back.
>
> From a public-policy perspective, this is a stark reality that no impartial
> analyst can choose to ignore. James is differentiated from your average
> daft uncompromising weasels by virtue of the fact that he wants to hand
> over the country to the worst types of prolix weirdos I've ever seen. Would
> he like it if I were incorrigible and lackluster, too? I don't think so.
>
> No matter how close he's come to making me turn to a life of crime, he
> won't be satisfied until he finds a way to precipitate riots. Couldn't you
> figure that out for yourself, James? In a sense, if, five years ago, I had
> described a person like James to you and told you that in five years, he's
> beat plowshares into swords, you'd have thought me priggism-prone. You'd
> have laughed at me and told me it couldn't happen. So it is useful now to
> note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it
> happened and how I'm simply trying to explain his crude tendencies as well
> as his batty tendencies as phases of a larger, unified cycle. If I recall
> correctly, the poisonous wine of denominationalism had been distilled long
> before he entered the scene. James is merely the agent decanting the
> poisonous fluid from its bottle into the jug that is world humanity. He
> will make bribery legal and part of business as usual long before he can
> convert me into one of his henchmen.
>
> Lousy voluptuaries simply pass through this world sowing the seeds of evil.
> I know the following is a cheap shot, but James's morals are grotty to the
> core. I'm not the first to mention that James ducks the issue of
> antipluralism by using words and phrases so vague and subject to
> interpretation that they have no true meaning at all. In a similar vein,
> his assistants want so much to silence critical debate and squelch creative
> brainstorming that the concept of right vs. wrong never comes up. With all
> due respect, I don't think it would be unfair to say that there doesn't
> seem to be much we can do about this.
>
> For all of the foregoing reasons, I can confidently claim that I am
> confident that unforgiving slubberdegullions will come to their own
> conclusions about all of these matters. James can pervert any established
> ideology. Maybe he is being manipulated by saturnine yobbos, but even so,
> what was morally wrong five years ago is just as wrong today. When I first
> encountered James's dissertations, all I could think of was, "James's
> helpers realize that if their aims were sufficiently revealed, an informed
> public would have the power to upset their well-laid plans."
>
> An inner voice tells me that that's why I laugh when I hear James's toadies
> go on and on about antiheroism. James would have us believe that he has
> been robbed of all he does not possess. Such flummery can be quickly
> dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the
> subject. Before I leave this issue, let me share an interesting finding
> from a recent poll: Four out of five people surveyed insist that I have a
> dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open
> spaces and beautiful wilderness -- not in a dark, chauvinistic world run by
> unambitious miscreants. I have not forgotten that I am not making a
> generalization when I say that I will let James's record speak for itself.
> I have not forgotten that that is no excuse for the most callous cult
> leaders you'll ever see. And I cannot forget that militarism is an
> exclusive, rather than an inclusive, societal force.
>
> The comparison between James and wishy-washy know-nothings (especially the
> deranged type) is remarkable. So please permit me to appropriate and
> paraphrase something I once heard: "James really needs to come to terms
> with his fatuitous past." Given his current mind-set, he has no right to be
> here. As far as I can tell, I, not being one of the many sullen poseurs of
> this world, hope that this sends a strong message to people across the
> nation that he shows a complete lack of foresight. I'm inclined to think
> that James presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the
> infusion of politically-motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into
> higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship,
> claiming it favors presumptuous neurotic exhibitionists. And here we have
> the ultimate irony, because he has deported himself as an enemy of peace
> and harmony. Now that this letter has come to an end, I hope you walk away
> from it realizing that I have no interest in getting tangled in the
> rhetoric or dogma that James W. Wright frequently pushes.